Responses to My Lefamine Report
All Emails in their raw and original forms-no editing, other than weeding out personal info (such as Ph#, addresses, etc). Any of these participants have right to request me to remove any or all of the info they feel they do not wish to be public. From what I heard, they posted and shared my emails on the Yahoo Constitutionalist site. I have agreed to bury the hatchet with all these folks, have not heard back from Susan-suspect I will not.
I was not always polite nor Christ-like, I have apologized to these folks and they to me, I have repented and we need to move on.
Reed Responds:
CR: would rather have you on my side in the fight against baby killers, sodomites and NWO'ers than them any day.
"Reed R. Heustis, Jr." <Reed@ReedHeustis.com> wrote:
AIM: LosAngelesDude
Y!: RRHeustisJr
Sign up for my *free* email newsletter:
http://ReedHeustis.com
----- Original Message -----
From: John Chance
To: Reed R. Heustis, Jr.
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: Thanks
I am not all over the place, it is you that obfiscate. You cannot prove your system of Bible ALone. You cannot prove your system at all. You cannot address the simple charges I made about anything.
As in my last email to you, we have nothing to discuss until you can prove, clearly and without any doubt, that the Bible says "do not listen to anything that is not written in this book".
As you cannot, will see you on the other side!!!!!!!
"Reed R. Heustis, Jr."wrote:
AIM: LosAngelesDude
Y!: RRHeustisJr
Sign up for my *free* email newsletter:
http://ReedHeustis.com
----- Original Message -----
From: John Chance
To: Reed R. Heustis, Jr.
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: Thanks
Reed,
you are a broken record, side stepping my comments about your bigoted and outdated lingo. IF you went by the Bible alone, why do you need the Reformed beleifs and creeds brought to you by Calvin?
Rather-what is your favorite word of the day-hypocritical.
IF you did follow the Bible, then get thee behind me and back into the One and Only Church of Christ, the Catholic Church. If not, then we are really wasting our time here, no??
"Reed R. Heustis, Jr." <Reed@ReedHeustis.com> wrote:
CR:
ahaha
No, the "room" should go to the Bostonian fist loving sodomites. Look forward to hearing the great work still for you to do in the future!
Best to you and your family,
JCScott Whiteman
#message #yiv1168971136 v\:* {}#message #yiv1168971136 o\:* {}#message #yiv1168971136 w\:* {}#message #yiv1168971136 .shape {}
#message #yiv1168971136 st1\:*{}
One of the guys previously copied told me last night he stopped reading when it appeared that you and I ought to get a room.
Scott T. Whiteman
Attorney, Peroutka & Peroutka
SWhiteman@Peroutkalaw.com
From: John Chance [mailto:catholicresistence@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 4:53 PMTo: Scott WhitemanSubject: RE: Fw: Steve Lefamine Profile
I accept any apology and I apologize as well for unkind words, thoughts and the like. We can disagree over theology. I will continue to pray for you, please d othe same for me, as I can always use prayers.
I seek not disagreements and would look forward to moving forward in peace and good will, though we have differences. As one of my best friends is a Baptist minister (still trying to win him over to CP, a little too Neo-conny still) and my wife and family are Protestants (more distant family, not parents), I can disagree but have amiable relationships.
I wish you and your family health and happiness. You as well, as I assume that you are healed adequately from your injury and life changing events.
Not sure why you were drawn to Reformed as opposed to Catholic upbringing, but that is you business-to share or otherwise.Scott Whiteman
If you are so inclined, I have not, nor have the time really, looked for any particular nasty-names I’ve called you on TAV. Do you recall any done in public? If so, or if you find them, send me a love-note, and I’ll either remove the reference, or apologize, or both, as the case may demand. You suggest that unlike Lofton, I’ve called you names. If that is true, again I apologize, but I want to go a step further to fix it.
I want yours and my disagreements, if we must have them, to be over Theology, not name-calling.
Scott T. Whiteman
Attorney, Peroutka & Peroutka
SWhiteman@Peroutkalaw.com
From: John Chance [mailto:catholicresistence@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 11:34 AMTo: Scott WhitemanSubject: RE: Fw: Steve Lefamine Profile
I agree, I too "backslid" as some Evangelicals use the term. I repented and strive daily to improve my understanding and strengthen the Faith. As I noted to Joe Liberty a few minutes ago, you may be a swell fellow to hang with and have a beer with. I do not know. You and I can work together against a common foe, for instance, schools that have un-natural interests in fists and Sodomites. etc.
As I am concerned, yes I say we have a truce. I accept any/all apologies and offer my sincerest as well. Please pass along to Joe, Reed, Angela, Susan, etc as they may not get the message from me.
Best to you and your family, please pass along same to Michael Peroutka and John Lofton -2 men I have some disagreements with but at least respect and would also rather have in my corner than the lukewarm.
-CRScott Whiteman
Quote: “How do you, a mere man, know you were going to Hell? Rocking in impurity?”
Yup. My “social life,” my blasphemies, my idolatries, my scandals, my thoughts, my actions, my gods, etc. I was a miserable wretch, and still am. As then my sin merited my damnation, now Christ’s sacrifice earns my salvation, and for that I will never be ashamed.
Thanks for your second note. I trust you and I are reconciled as to sins committed against each other. If any one brings to my attention, “Did you see what John Chance wrote about you” on any date prior to 4:21 PM, October 4, 2006, I will say, “Covered over.” Same?
If you must make accusations against me, please be specific, provide notice, and permit me the opportunity to respond (if not review). As stated, I will neither make any against you on TAV (I have no other venue), nor permit others to. If you see any from any one else on TAV, please notify me and I will correct it, and them.
Seems to me, iron did sharpen iron, as both of us have relented, even if just a bit.
Scott T. Whiteman
Attorney, Peroutka & Peroutka
SWhiteman@Peroutkalaw.com
From: John Chance [mailto:catholicresistence@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 4:13 PMTo: Scott WhitemanSubject: RE: Fw: Steve Lefamine Profile
First, sory to hear abou t the injury this was tragic and glad you were able to bounce back, I truly am.
No, I am not into anus', men or any combo you noted below. Just trying to be funny-apparently, no night at the Appollo for me.
Sorry I responded, I will respond to you in this email and the other one yet unopened. Then, you can respond all you want, just make sure to tell your allies I will not write back.
Why the turning from the Faith, nominally or otherwise? It is not a waste to bring back a brother from error, nor to pray for them. How do you, a mere man, know you were going to Hell? Rocking in impurity? or just plain old Catholic? The 1st will get you there, the second-nope.
As far as dealing with you, yes you left and your wit nad mind-both sharp, will no longer apply pressure to Hansen. If you do not wish to build the Party with Mormons, then who else should be "excluded"?
What did your side think about Mormonism and your take on it in ref to Tampa ?
Well, God bless and let me review your other note to me.Scott Whiteman
In what I hope to have been your last letter, you started out with the bang by stating, “Your constant use of ‘shut up’ is rather childish and far beneath me to respond anymore to you.” But then you ruined it by responding.
Done some research on me, eh? Was that in insult, “put that in your undercover tape recorder”? I didn’t know you supported adult men teaching kids how to stick their hands into each other’s anus’. Yup. I was an excellent runner. Fastest Senior in the nation in the 1000yrds in 1992. First-Team NCAA All-American in 1993. First-rate sinner going to hell until Christ saved me.
I’m sorry you wasted such time – I’m certainly not worth the effort. For the record, I was practically, if not nominally, Reformed prior to God having yanked my hamstring from my hip-bone and bunching it in my knee, ensuring I would not pursue my dreams of being an Olympian, and rather diverting me to His paths.
I wanted to make Tampa about Mormonism. I was outvoted by “my side.” I did leave the CP afterward, and probably would have even if “our side” won, because I personally cannot work with non-Christians in “kingdom building.” Shearer quoted me as having written (para.), “when we build we must do so with Christians.” He took it out of context, since it wasn’t a recommendation for CP, rather an appeal as one Reformed Christian to another, Howard Phillips, and a declaration of my intent personally if the vote doesn’t go against the Mormons in Tampa .
I’m gone now, along with my big and nasty words. So why am I even an issue to you? I’m just an attorney in Maryland with no connection to CP in any way. If Shearer, Odem, etc. have a problem with me, I know they’ll deal with as uncharitably and scandalously as in the past in the California Statesman.
Scott T. Whiteman
Attorney, Peroutka & Peroutka
SWhiteman@Peroutkalaw.com
From: John Chance [mailto:catholicresistence@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 2:44 PMTo: Scott WhitemanSubject: RE: Fw: Steve Lefamine Profile
Your constant use of "shut up" is rather childish and far beneath me to respond anymore to you.
I, unlike you, do not have all day to spend on the web. I was thinking and having good exchanges on the TAV site, you just did not like the responses and content, let alone your rather unbalanced responses to me on TAV. Others, while not always agreeing with me, seem not to have a problem with me as you did. White on rice were YOUR comments, though your attitude, tone and constantly hounding on me were telling.
I had rather few oppotunities that you seem to think so, alwo, you cut me off many times nad diverted. I have seen on the TAV site and other links on the web that you are described as a member of Peroutka and Peroutka-do you Lawyer for free? OF course not. No, know one was "kicked off for being non-Reformed", but we were certainly ganged up on and attacked constantly. Even before the Tampa vote, you and your allies did not clearly tell other, non-Reformed members TAV was Reformed site. You let them, as they saw TAV as a continuation of the Peroutka 2004 camapign and that Peroutka was a Executive member of CP, be attacked. Yes, you suuure did not have a religious purification agenda with the CP, esp since you stated repeatedly stated you cannot work with others outside your Reformed camp.
Why, then, your fight in Tampa ? Just leave the Babylon CP and start your very own, Reformed Party? No, as Gary Odom noted, the abortion issue was a red herring. Mayb teh CP represnted a new Geneva Dictatorship. Who knows.
Yes, legal talk can at times be above my training, so you do not need to "talk down to me" as YOU put it, but make it clearer. You are mighty arrogant in your education, are you not?
Guess being a Calvin follower makes you that way, no?? Reformed's are generally this way, not all, but too many.
BTW- what happened to you in the sports accident? What made you, while recooperating, turn for the True faith to man made Calvinism??
Peroutka is largely humble, you have an almost possessed nature. Too bad you did not spend the time studying your Faith.
As to costing Michael,. I have yet to hear, either from Odom, Shearer or anyone else, criticisms of Peroutka absent of you. You seem to be the big mouth that has turned Tz1, Brenda, me and others off at TAV-we no longer support TAV nor want much to do with it. IF Peroutka ran again, I would be reeeal hard to support him, unless he did not have you on staff.
Rarely, then, do others or I have issues with Peroutka. You are the one that is the wild boar in the woods.
Finally, how would I know what your contract is, beyond the point you are a lawyer-probably with school debts and an employee of Peroutka's. So again, are you sitting on millions of $$? No, you have to earn an income somehow. I am sure, if I wanted to waste a lot of time, I could find out. As Micheal is largely insulated at TAV, I wont know as he does not talk to us individually too much.
IF you want me to dig into your back ground, fine. I have several articles on you I have found, your income is public record. I do not have the time, energy or interest to do so.
As your title says,
Attorney, Peroutka & Peroutka
http://us.f398.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=SWhiteman@Peroutkalaw.com
I have apologized for name calling and it is up to you to forgive the "crap" comment.
As to your childish "shut ups", that is more in line with your kids than a overtly proud attorney. And you think you are predestined
-JCScott Whiteman
You seem to impute my lack of regard for you to anti-Catholicism. Truth be told, it’s anti-John Chancism. I gave you opportunity after opportunity on TAV to substantiate your claims, rather than just assert them. You did not. Because you lack information. If you cannot demonstrate the truthfulness of any of your 6 assertions below, shut up.
“White on rice” wasn’t about you being non-Reformed – it was about you being non-thinking.
Prove how I get paid, and what the details of my contract are. Also, prove that I don’t like spending time with Steve Peroutka – you cannot prove it.
TAV has not kicked any one out for being non-Reformed. If you can prove otherwise, please do so – otherwise, shut up.
How is it back room if I’ve done things in the open? Have I cost Michael? Prove it. If so, I am sorry, to him, because I know he does not agree with my tact or opinion on many things.
Specify that from which I must repent. You have not. You give general charges. Truth, I sin. But I don’t repent of “sin,” rather specific sins. Help me identify them – or shut up.
You are without knowledge of my contractual relationship with Michael – nor the speed at which I can type, so you have no idea how much time I’ve spent on anything.
Haven’t read your blog. What, did Joe? Perhaps he is wasting his time. I don’t have any control over Joe.
I’m sorry for revealing the amount I contributed to CP. I should not have done that.
If using language legal in nature is above you, I will talk down to you from now on.
Scott T. Whiteman
Attorney, Peroutka & Peroutka
SWhiteman@Peroutkalaw.com
From: John Chance [mailto:catholicresistence@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 1:22 PMTo: Scott WhitemanSubject: RE: Fw: Steve Lefamine Profile
Wow, and they say I am crude and rude. I see your normal attitude in emails are the same as on your site.
As far as Peroutka, I still respect him and glad for my vote of him in 2004.
As for your dealings:
1. On your site, you area pit bull and attack anyone that is non-Reformed (you know, on my like white on rice")
2. Peroutka pays you via your employment at Peroutka and Peroutka (it must gall you to hang out with Stephen and other Peroutka Papists)
3. There is no reigning in your leach with your attacks and purging of non-Reformed members of TAV. You have largely, with your allies there, purged many of us that came over to TAV after the 2004 election that were non-Reformed.
4. You have cost him greatly for your sniveling tactics and backroom machinations. He is laregly done in CP not because he is decent, kind nad fair, but thanks to your unhinged tactics.
5. I have yet to hear, see, read, etc any correction of your words and actions at TAV.
6. You seem to have plenty of time on your hands, so Peroutka must not seem to care that you apparently do any Lawyer-ing there.
I, in my last email to Joe to apologize for my "piece of crap" comment about you, noting that as afalllen person, I was harsh and uncharitable.
You have left CP and I am busy with my blog. IF you all do not like it, do not read it. I do not have hte $$$ to have my own TAV-like site.
As a side note, you in one of your last notes to me on Forum of TAV noted you are saving your $1000 contribution you used to give to CP-this is a rather shameful bragging. Soe to use your use of Agency of Law. I am not a lawyer, as few people are. You may wish to use everyday language in the future, unless your use of AL is another "look how damn smart I am" ploy.
There is that, put that in your undercover tape recorder.Scott Whiteman
Would you please substantiate your as of late unfounded claim that Michael Peroutka hides behind me, a piece of crap attack dog and mouth piece. As far as the law of agency goes, have I ever held myself out as Michael’s mouth piece, or further, as Agency Law would actually require, has Michael ever claimed that I speak on his behalf? You are utterly without understanding, and suffer from a complete dearth of knowledge about the inter-workings of my business with Michael.
Prove that Michael agrees with me, or shut it.
Scott T. Whiteman
Attorney, Peroutka & Peroutka
SWhiteman@Peroutkalaw.com
----- Original Message ----From: John Chance
Read my blog about the AHP-you will see the cookies and milk are definately not out.
I am not anti-Protestant (my wife is Baptist, my mother entire side is as well). I oppose the false, devil inspired system, not the people entrapped in it.
IF Steve is proud, well, good for him. Lets all stop acting and be ourselves. Dan Eby from what I hear was at least honest enough to leave the CP as it was "soiled" by use non-Calvin lovers.
Too bad Peroutka hides behind that piece of crap Whiteman-his attack dog and mouth piece. Peroutka persona non grat in the CP is thanks to Scott, for most that I have talked to place the blame at Scott's door, but as a Peroutka hirling, he brings the whole ship down.
Guess Angela did not take long to whine at TAV, eh??Joe Liberty
Angela,
Defend Steve against what exactly? John accuses him of being "anti-Catholic." I could be wrong, but I doubt very much that Steve would object to that label. If anybody is anti-Catholic surely Steve is. As a Reformed Christian I suppose you could describe me as anti-Catholic as well. I would think most Catholics are anti-Protestant as well. It is really a news flash that,historically, Reformed Christians have viewed Catholics as anti-Christ and Catholics have viewed Protestants as schismatics and heretics? I really wouldn't expect a blog for and about Catholics to sing Steve's praises.
I believe John is wrong in calling the AHP a "Protestant-only" party. I specifically asked their chairman Dan Eby about it and he indicated Catholics are welcome to join as long as they believe Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior (that's my recollection of our phone conversation of a few weeks ago). To my knowledge Stave has not joined the AHP.
----- Original Message ----From: Angela Wittman
Dear Friends,
Please rally to the defense of our brother Steve Lefemine!
Angela WittmanAmerican Heritage Party, Illinoishttp://www.americanheritageparty.org/For more information, please contact: http://us.f398.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=contact@ahparty.org
"To walk in the truth, imports a life of integrity, holiness, faithfulness, and simplicity.. ." The Prince of Preachers: Charles Haddon Spurgeon
----- Original Message -----
From: John Chance
To: http://us.f398.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=wittman@htc.net
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 1:58 PM
Subject: Steve Lefamine Profile
http://catholicresistence.blogspot.com/2006/10/steve-lefamine-bigot-on-move.html
Angela, sent to Steve at last known address, do hope it was received. As he joined your Protestant only AHP yet??
.
Joe Liberty Responds to me:
John, You described the AHP as "Protestant-Only." Yet when I asked their chairman if Catholics were welcome, he told me that they were. I told him that several members of our state party are Roman Catholic and he said that would not prevent our party from affiliating with the AHP if we chose to do so. You say you are not anti-Protestant, yet you call our faith a devil-inspired system. That makes you anti-Protestant, just as much as Steve is anti-Catholic. We don't hate Catholics, we just disagree with their religion. This is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black. Referring to Scott as a "piece of crap" reveals you to be the very sort of bigot you whine about, and uncouth as well. And what "whole ship" are you talking about? If I'm not mistaken Scott resigned from the Executive Committee and Maryland withdrew from the Constitution Party. If you are a member of the Constitution Party, what exactly are you complaining about? It seems to me you are well on your way to purging the party of Reformed Christians, which sounds like what you want anyway. You don't like Steve Lefemine because he is anti-Catholic? So what? He isn't in your party and hasn't been for a long time now. Pretend you're right and Catholics are not welcome in the AHP. You are not a member of that party, so why do you care?
----- Original Message ----From: John Chance <catholicresistence@yahoo.com>To: Joe Liberty <joseph@patriotsaints.com>Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2006 8:00:52 AMSubject: Re: Fw: Steve Lefamine Profile
Read my blog about the AHP-you will see the cookies and milk are definately not out. I am not anti-Protestant (my wife is Baptist, my mother entire side is as well). I oppose the false, devil inspired system, not the people entrapped in it. IF Steve is proud, well, good for him. Lets all stop acting and be ourselves. Dan Eby from what I hear was at least honest enough to leave the CP as it was "soiled" by use non-Calvin lovers. Too bad Peroutka hides behind that piece of crap Whiteman-his attack dog and mouth piece. Peroutka persona non grat in the CP is thanks to Scott, for most that I have talked to place the blame at Scott's door, but as a Peroutka hirling, he brings the whole ship down. Guess Angela did not take long to whine at TAV, eh??
Joe Liberty <joe_liberty@yahoo.com> wrote:
Angela, Defend Steve against what exactly? John accuses him of being "anti-Catholic." I could be wrong, but I doubt very much that Steve would object to that label. If anybody is anti-Catholic surely Steve is. As a Reformed Christian I suppose you could describe me as anti-Catholic as well. I would think most Catholics are anti-Protestant as well. It is really a news flash that,historically, Reformed Christians have viewed Catholics as anti-Christ and Catholics have viewed Protestants as schismatics and heretics? I really wouldn't expect a blog for and about Catholics to sing Steve's praises. I believe John is wrong in calling the AHP a "Protestant-only" party. I specifically asked their chairman Dan Eby about it and he indicated Catholics are welcome to join as long as they believe Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior (that's my recollection of our phone conversation of a few weeks ago). To my knowledge Stave has not joined the AHP.
----- Original Message ----From: Angela Wittman <wittman@htc.net>To: Constitutionalists <Constitutionalists@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2006 5:35:22 PMSubject: [CDF] Fw: Steve Lefamine Profile
Dear Friends, Please rally to the defense of our brother Steve Lefemine! Angela WittmanAmerican Heritage Party, Illinoishttp://www.american/ heritageparty. org/For more information, please contact: contact@ahparty. org "To walk in the truth, imports a life of integrity, holiness, faithfulness, and simplicity.. ." The Prince of Preachers: Charles Haddon Spurgeon ----- Original Message ----- From: John Chance To: wittman@htc. net Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 1:58 PM Subject: Steve Lefamine Profile http://catholicresi/ stence.blogspot. com/2006/ 10/steve- lefamine- bigot-on- move.html Angela, sent to Steve at last known address, do hope it was received. As he joined your Protestant only AHP yet??. __,_._,___
CR:Joe, Please tell Susan to scamper back to her liberlaistic, modernistic New Church. The Sacrement is Penance, "reconcilliation" was a give away. For the record, since you wish to dredge up a Prop Catholic, I was not attacking Scott personally and have apologized to him and to others for my "piece of crap" comment. John Lofton and I disagree, I have NEVER been called names by him nor mistreated. I have no beef w/him other than his comments, such as that immigrants from south of the border, whne entering, need to have religious tests (see my past blogs as I will not recount) to "see what they believe". This is suspicious. I have never stated explicitly that either are 'Catholic haters". The words Scott and others (exempting Lofton) have used is hateful, as is their approach to me at TAV and the wording. Too many Catholics have a naivete, thinking that Protestants are all lovy-dovy and think of us as equals, etc. Most have never read a Papal Encyclical and most are dwelling in never-never land of Evangelicals, largely sold out to the Robertsons of the world that just looove Catholics, providing they drag us down with them in GOP Idolotry. Susan needs to get a grip and find out what her Faith teaches. She seems to have indifferentism. Also, though a bit overdue, I go to confession/Penance every few months, supplanting it with Benediction/Adoration weekly and Latin Mass when possible. No doubt, she has not read or seen all that has been said, in these emails and at TAV forum. Again, if TAV from the start was declared Reformed site, I would have avoided it. Istead, Catholics and Mormons were weeded out and turned off the the CP long before the Tampa vote. Susan maybe a nice gal, but she is blind if all she knows is IOTC and the 2 men. She has not read, heard and seen up close anything. Tell her a priest is my spiritual director, not a woman and certainly not one that has little to no facts and experience to back up her quisling attacks. I have apologized to those I may have been harsh with and accepted apologies to me. I have nothing against Peroutka, nor Lofton. I am trying to find some understanding, common ground and mend fences with Whiteman now. I stand with Protestant friends, family and others for common interests, but I also know that over-familiartiy with non-Catholics can breed laxity, confusion and temptations. Please pass on to Susan that Scott leaving the Church is an act, in the eyes of the Church, as heretical and anti-Catholic (no, not the same anti as active persecution of us). I am sure that Scott is a wonderful fellow, decent guy and probably a heck of a buddy to have a beer with, etc. Susan needs to take her Faith more seriously, and worry less about what she thinks is sinful. No Susan, in the eyes of Christ, it DOES mater "what ever sect of Christianity you chose to follow", yet again more liberal New Church lingo. As far as vile and hateful, Susan needs to read up more on CHurch history and needs to really know what has been said to us Catholics on TAV and other outlets before posing as my moral director and your quisling. I suggest she start with Pope Pius IX Syallabus of Errors. All Christian faiths are NOT equal, nor equally salvic. If she wants vile, let her read Repent America's forum, where many of the same folks there are in the Pro crowd (exempting Lofton, Peroutka and Scott). They are not all warm and touchy-feely for us. Let her read ALL the past posts of Catholics, from their first to their last and see what others said to them. Remember, I have monitored, read and participated in the TAV from the start. My smash mouth words are a response to this, it is not may nature to start out with people like this. Let her read my past blogs. As the book says, there is a time for peace and a time to fight. I came in peace to TAV, I tried to reach out my hand and asked for forgiveness when I wronged others. I tried to participate hoeslty nad charitably. You all at TAV responded with suspicion, attacks, insults (including last Christmas insults against the BVM) and the like. IF she wish to be that yellow stripe in the raod, that is her business, I will not. I work with Protestants all day on common goals. My wife is one. Some of our friends are (as well as her minister and wife). We can look for common goals and common understandings, but I will not lay down and be insulted and attacked. NO Catholic needs to run to "reconcilliation" for shining light into dark and defending the Faith. In the end, as I noted to Reed, I would rather have him in the trenches with me then the enemy--or a obvious liberal New Churcher
Joe Liberty <joe_liberty@yahoo.com> wrote:
FYI
----- Forwarded Message ----From: Susan Scanlon susiefrog2000@yahoo.com
I have been silent for a while, but feel I must respond now. As one who works for Michael Peroutka and Institute on the Constitution, I know John Lofton and Scott Whiteman personally. I am Roman Catholic and neither Scott nor John has ever said or done anything remotely anti-Catholic. Both of them vehemently disagree with some Catholic doctrine, but to paint either of these men as anti-Catholic or Catholic haters is wrong. I consider both of these men to be my friends, and am blessed to have such friends. Mr. Chance, I expect you to seek the sacrament of Reconciliation in the near future as the vile, hateful, un-Catholic accusations you have heaped upon my friends are sinful, no matter what sect of Christianity you choose to follow.
CR NOTE-indifferentism!!!
Angela Wittman response to me part 1:
Shake the dust I truly will, but a Christian needs to throw out the "lifeline", so-you pray for me, I will pray for you. Cant let your soul go, I will say a Rosary tonight for you!!
Best to you!!!Angela Wittman
Dear John,
I really believe it is time for you to shake the dust off your feet and let me go to hell.
Thank you,
Angela Wittman
----- Original Message -----
From: John Chance
To: Angela Wittman
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: [CDF] Re: Thanks
This is so childish and laughable, I have little to say. You were told-or should have been-to PROVE IT!!.
You cannot. As to false teaching, Arminianists, Anabaptists, Calvinsits, etc all go by the Bible ALone, yet you are constantly fighting with each other and no one can agree. HEnce you make up "essential/non-essential" doctrines, etc.
You have no guide, you are blind. Read about the Ethiopian, he-educated and wealthy as he was, did not understand Isaiah without Phillip guiding him the faith in Christ.
The Catholic Faith is 2000 yrs old, founded by Christ and is undivided in doctrine. We have the history, the biblical sacrements and the magestarium still.
Your faith is 500 yrs old, divided and has multiple guides going in every direction like a blidn guide.
I pray for YOU, as you have now been told the truth and it is incumbant on you to search for the Truth. Otherwise, prayer for you after you die is in vain. Start then to develop a love of heat, sulphur and terror.
final excerpt to ponder:
No Salvation Outside of the Church :"Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus"
There is no salvation outside of Christ, and the Church is the Bride of Christ -- become His Body, one Flesh in marriage. Therefore, there is no salvation outside of the Church and not belonging formally to the Catholic Church is objectively sinful:
Matthew 18:17"If he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican" Luke 10:16"He that heareth you heareth Me, and he that despiseth you despiseth Me, and he that despiseth Me, despiseth Him that sent Me" Mark 16:16"He that believeth not will be condemned" John 3:18"He that believeth not is already judged"Luke 11:23"He that is not with Me is against Me and he that gathereth not with Me, scattereth"
This does not mean, however, that if one is necessarily damned if one is not a formal member of the visible society of God's Kingdom on earth -- the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. What it means is that: Christ founded one Church with Peter as His Vicar; that this Church was given the powers of binding and loosing, that this Church exists today; that it is the source of the Gospel and the earthly source of the Sacraments without which, normatively, one cannot be saved. Those who are not formal members might be saved and become associated with the soul of the Church if they:
are validly baptized by water and spirit, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (all who are baptized are subject to the Church even if they are not formal members because Baptism belongs to the Church), and
have not committed a mortal sin (or who, if they have committed a mortal sin, have made a perfect act of contrition), which means a sin concerning a grave matter committed with full knowledge and consent of the will, and
are animated by charity and a supernatural Faith in God's existence, and
seek Him, and
firmly believe that their religion is the true religion such that there is no conflict or doubt about such in their ill-formed conscience, and
are not formally outside of the Church in spite of doubts about the possibility that the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ (if one believes it is possible that the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ, one is duty-bound to investigate)
In addition, those individuals who, through no fault of their own, have no means to hear of Christ-given Baptism and are invincibly ignorant -- who've never heard the Name Jesus, know nothing of the Church, or misunderstand Church teachings -- but who obey the Natural Law written in all men's hearts and who truly seek God are left to the mercy of Christ Who may save them as He desires. Christ will judge our wills, hearts, intellects, and deeds, and shall have mercy and compassion on whom He will have mercy and compassion (Romans 9:15); those whom He deigns to save He can well give the grace of the Sacraments to in a manner beyond our ken -- perhaps even in their final breath, by illuminating their souls in a supernatural way such that they desire Baptism, even if implicitly, and therefore become associated with the Soul of the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation. This is something we can never presume -- but we can pray for. I note here, too, that there is also the possibility of Limbo -- a state of perfect natural happiness -- for those who die unregenerated (unbaptized) and with the stain of original sin, but who've committed no personal sin. While these people would not enter Heaven as they are not born again of water and Spirit (or the desire for it), they would also experience no subjective sufferings. This teaching is not a part of revelation and is, therefore, not a matter of dogma. There is no consensus among the Church Fathers on the matter; some believed in the existence of Limbo (e.g., most of the Greek Fathers, St. Augustine in his early writings, St. Gregory Nanzianus, St. Ambrose, St. Thomas Aquinas) while others didn't (e.g., St. Augustine in his later writings, St. Anselm). But it is a most definite possibility that can be piously believed given the truths that God is not only merciful but just and, therefore, will not punish someone for that which involves no personal guilt. While believing this proposition, which is the prevalent belief among traditional Catholics, one must never forget how easy it is to sin -- and that most everyone who's reached the age of reason has (in fact, because of the rarity of those who've reached the age of reason and have not committed personal sins, "Limbo" is often referred to as "Children's Limbo.")These possibilities are left to the mercy of God, however, and the presumption of salvation in any sense on the part of anyone who is not a formal member of the the visible Church is a sin against the Holy Spirit. We can pray for such, but we cannot presume such. We cannot presume this association with the Soul of the Church on the part of any particular individual who is not a manifest member the Church; in fact, we are to presume the opposite because they are objectively in sin, even if not culpably so, and we must do all we can to bring them to the Sacraments, which are true media of grace. We are to preach the fullness of the Truth, pray for God's mercy on all who are apart from the Sacraments, and always remember that material heresy is still heresy, no matter the level of culpability a material heretic might possess. While some who are not formal members of the Church might be illumined before death such that they desire Baptism and are then allowed to see Heaven by the Grace of Christ and become, therefore, associated with the Soul of the Church, the non-Catholic elements of other religions do not mediate grace in and of themselves, and it is always God's will that all formally become part of the eternally unified Mystical Body of Christ. The salvation of these souls would be in spite of, not because of, their religion. In this regard, any "ecumenism" that is not false will have as its goal the bringing of all into the Church as formal members, be they Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, pagan, or secular. The goal of any true "ecumenism" isn't "unity" because the Church is already unified; His Body is already unified. The return of heretics, schismatics, and apostates to the bosom of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Catholic Church is the only goal of true ecumenism.The proper attitude to take toward the Truth that those who are not formal members of the Church might be saved if they meet the above criteria is expressed well in this analogy by Harold E. Welitz:
Let's say that a father kept a loaded gun in the house. Now, certainly it has occurred since the invention of the revolver that a bullet has failed to fire when the trigger was pulled. Therefore, based on this possibility should the father continually remind his children that if they play with a gun and shoot at each other, it may not go off? Would that be a wise and prudent father, one who truly cares for his children? If the father continually discussed the possibility that the gun may not go off if the trigger were pulled, would he be misleading his children? Yes! Although what he is saying is not false, it is deceptive because it implies that something that is rare is actually likely. The result will be that the children will become more negligent in playing with loaded guns, which most likely will kill one of them. Should the father not say: "Do not play with a loaded gun, whatever you do! If you play with a loaded gun, someone will get killed." A wise and prudent father may realize there are a very slight percentage of bullets that are defective, but he knows it is not wise to continually remind his children of this, lest they become forgetful of the dangers of playing with loaded guns.
To carry the metaphor further: Catholics don't let non-Catholics play with guns. When others do play with guns, we can pray and have human hope that they don't get shot, but we can't expect or have a "good hope" that they won't. If, in fact, they are not "shot," we know that they are a part of the Church outside of which there is no salvation.Bottom line: We can't know the subjective states of the souls of manifest heretics, and we can't know how God might or might not illumine the the souls of the invincibly ignorant. But we can and do know what He has revealed about Himself, and we must tell others this Gospel. We can and do know what He told us about His Church, and we must bring people to it. We can and do know what He told us to do, and we must do it. And we must do these things with firmness, boldness, prudence, and great charity, all while begging mercy for sinners, including ourselves.
(http://www.fisheaters.com/101.html)
Maybe limbo?Angela Wittman
Dear John,
I remember having similar discussions with Christopher Hansen, to no avail and this is why I refuse to argue with you.
Unless you believe in Scripture alone, you will forever be prey to false teaching.
I pray the LORD will deliver both you and Mr. Hansen from your false religions.
For His Glory, Angela Wittman Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised. Proverbs 31:30 KJV http://www.angelawittman.net/
----- Original Message -----
From: Reed R. Heustis, Jr.
To: John Chance
Cc: CDF
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 12:48 PM
Subject: [CDF] Re: Thanks
I guess that acknowledgement is not forthcoming.
Oh well, I tried.
Reed R. Heustis, Jr.Los Angeles County, California
Angela Wittman part 2:
First, God be praised you are out of that miserable condition of-presumbly-depression and the like.
Glad you are a Christian, since I presume, you had no Christian faith (Protestant or Catholic) prior.
Beleive me or not, you have far more to offer the world here and as happy as you are now. I for one am thrilled to see that you are here and doing what you think is right.
Ultimately, God alone decides ones eternal disposition.
BTW- Sola Scriptura is Anti-Bible and Anti-Christian. Doubt me, find one Early Church Father that stated we are to go by the Bible ALONE. Find one scripture passage that says it. Paul is clear we are to follow scripture and the Church teachers.
But, glad you are here Ma'am!!!!!Angela Wittman
Dear John and all others,
Prior to 1993 I was a miserable, wretched sinner on the verge of suicide as I could not find the strength to make myself good enough to be a disciple of Jesus Christ. I knew my works were filthy rags, even though I was not in deep sin. I was a homemaker (and still am) married to a wonderful man with two sons in a large, expensive home on 8 acres with a lake, pond, and a creek in an upper scale neighborhood .
I had it all in material possessions, but spiritually I was bankrupt, and I knew it.
Praise the LORD! He pulled me out of the pit I was in and placed me in a Presbyterian Church where I finally learned the doctrines of grace.
Sola Scriptura!
For His Glory, Angela Wittman Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised. Proverbs 31:30 KJV http://www.angelawittman.net/
----- Original Message -----
From: John Chance
To: Angela Wittman
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: Steve Lefamine Profile
See blog, inclusive of comments w/links for anyone to read for themselves (you know, kinda like sola scriptura). HE lays down w/dogs, up w/fleas
BTW- the AHP is not a Protestant only site?
Her eis what ANgela Wittmans states her self, after telling us she apparently was not a Christian until 1993 (great deal, but what were you prior to 1993???)
http://www.angelawittman.net/index_files/page0003.htm
I am now a member of the American Heritage Party which “affirms its belief in the triune God of the Holy Bible and acknowledges that the Bible is the highest and final authority to which all other authorities and ideas must ultimately yield."
Viola-Sola Scriptura, hence a Protestant faith community belief.
Try again and please pass on to Reed and others for simplicity of traffic.Angela Wittman
posted by John Chance at 10:17 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home